It goes without saying that the Left absolutely hates Dinesh's blockbuster, 2016. And those who do mention it, do so with a vitriol they once only reserved for the Bush clan. The real question is why aren't all of them jumping on the bashwagon?

The only plausible explanation is that they realize that any publicity can only help the movie... and the movie's narrative. Unlike individuals, who can have their reputations and popularity tarnished by repeated attacks, this bit of cinema only shines brighter the more attention they draw to it. By keeping the tone scholarly and conversational, D'Souza effectively prevents quotes or snippets from being taken out of context and used in attacks.

Given that it is relatively immune to anything except 'foaming at the mouth' attacks, and even those assaults would only drive more people to the theater, liberals are hoping to ignore it to death. Unfortunately for them, the Uncertain Middle (the ones who watch both CNN and FOX) might be intrigued by what they are hearing and pony up their $9-$16 to see it firsthand.

I'd tell them to save their money but I want the theaters to continue to fill up for awhile longer. The reason I say this is that I strongly suspect he will push this to DVD and possibly to even free distribution sometime before November.

P.S. A relative asked my fourteen year-old daughter what movie she wanted to see, she picked 2016. I'm so proud of her! (This is the vanity portion of my post, ha!)

I’ll tell you something about this movie that surprised me. I live in Chicago, in a neighborhood that has become trendy and full of liberals in the last ten years or so. Right next to my house is a arthouse-type movie theatre that usually plays all the hot new independent and foreign films that appeal to this demographic. They have had all the Michael Moore documentaries, first run. Last week, I noticed that they were now playing 2016.

I’m not sure how to explain that, except maybe they are hurting for business and willing to try anything. Otherwise, I can only imagine that enough liberals want to see the movie that they demanded it be shown.

In 2008, there was a successful blackout on any discussion of Obama’s ties to Reverend Wright and Bill Ayers (which our “champion” McCain went along with), so clearly the Libs think that they can do the same thing if they ignore 2016.

For decades, so-called "progressives," especially media "progressives," have ignored that which might shine the light of truth on the deliberate agenda to "transform" America from its constitutional foundations in liberty to just another of the collectivist/redistributionist regimes!

And, for decades, it worked!

Now that the bold Obama agenda is playing out, and the disastrous consequences of their arrogant extra-constitutional policies are being seen and felt, that tactic won't work as well.

Why are they not attacking this movie? Because they are letting GOP pundits do so. In two weeks, in the Washington Examiner - a free paper from the Washington Times - two GOP pundits have lambasted it, one referring to the author as the rights Michael Moore. Once again, we eat our own.

Because attacks would draw more attention to the movie. 2016 hasn't gotten anything close to the promotion and hype from the MSM and Hollywood that Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11 got - why would the Left want to change that?

I saw it on Monday along with 3 other friends. The fact that it was civil and used Obama’s own words on how he intends to destroy the United States is powerful.

Americans need to believe what Obama is saying - the Dreams from his Father - a man he met only once - demonstrate his hate for the US in a way that cannot be mistaken. Most of what is in the movie we have seen over the past four years - put together in this format it is powerful and frightening.

By not being a rabid Michael Moore - D’Souza created a though provoking movie that would be very helpful in not reelecting Obama.

At the end the audience which was 3/4 full at the first showing stood and applauded!

I havent seen it, but a friend told me he thought 2016 did not go far enough against Obama. Thoughts?

Having read "The Roots of Obama's Rage" before seeing the movie, I think it's important to do both: see the movie and read the book. The movie is 89 minutes long which suggests to me they were aiming for 90 minutes max - and that's just not long enough. There are several loose ends in the movie (such as Obama's attitude toward the space program) that might flash past a viewer that hasn't read the book.

On the other side, the visuals are so powerful that it makes the movie a "must see" if you can.

I saw the movie and was disappointed and frustrated. The background music overpowered the narrative and made it hard to understand for long segments. Much of the time the narration was a mere mumble under the music out of which I could pick a few words. One would think that a video editor on a PC could have rebalanced the sound easily enough.

This was my reaction too when I first saw the film. There is so much that he has done in office. The 900 executive orders that take over the role of Congress, the grabs of power hidden in the legislation he has rammed through, there’s so much. Some of it not simple enough for a movie, maybe that’s why.

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.